All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>,
	Alex Duyck <aduyck@mirantis.com>, Netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	intel-wired-lan <intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org>,
	Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@redhat.com>,
	Jesse Gross <jesse@kernel.org>,
	Eugenia Emantayev <eugenia@mellanox.com>,
	Jiri Benc <jbenc@redhat.com>,
	Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@mellanox.com>,
	Ariel Elior <ariel.elior@qlogic.com>,
	Michael Chan <michael.chan@broadcom.com>,
	Dept-GELinuxNICDev@qlogic.com
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v3 00/17] Future-proof tunnel offload handlers
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 10:05:08 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKgT0Ucze-+PYdvoHhDSLuaTLrn+Ene+CnfJaKO7AEHGHBsKzg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160621.042211.945844554759834352.davem@davemloft.net>

On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 1:22 AM, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
> From: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
> Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 10:05:01 -0700
>
>> Generally, this means it needs to at least match by local addresses
>> and port for an unconnected/unbound socket, the source address for
>> an unconnected/bound socket, a the full 4-tuple for a connected
>> socket.
>
> These lookup keys are all insufficient.
>
> At the very least the network namespace must be in the lookup key as
> well if you want to match "sockets".  And this is just the tip of the
> iceberg in my opinion.
>
> The namespace bypassing to me is the biggest flaw in the UDP tunnel
> offloads.  That is creating real dangers right now.

I agree.  Fortunately this only really becomes an issue if SR-IOV is
enabled.  Otherwise the port based offloads only affect the PF as long
as no VFs are present.

> But anyways, the vastness of the key is why we want to keep "sockets"
> out of network cards, because proper support of "sockets" requires
> access to information the card simply does not and should not have.

Right.  Really what I would like to see for most of these devices is a
2 tuple filter where you specify the UDP port number, and the PF/VF ID
that the traffic is received on.  In order to get that we wouldn't
need any additional information from the API.  Then we at least have
indirect namespace isolation, and if someone really wanted to they
could do offloads on the VFs for different traffic.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com>
To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org
Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [net-next PATCH v3 00/17] Future-proof tunnel offload handlers
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 10:05:08 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKgT0Ucze-+PYdvoHhDSLuaTLrn+Ene+CnfJaKO7AEHGHBsKzg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160621.042211.945844554759834352.davem@davemloft.net>

On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 1:22 AM, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
> From: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
> Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 10:05:01 -0700
>
>> Generally, this means it needs to at least match by local addresses
>> and port for an unconnected/unbound socket, the source address for
>> an unconnected/bound socket, a the full 4-tuple for a connected
>> socket.
>
> These lookup keys are all insufficient.
>
> At the very least the network namespace must be in the lookup key as
> well if you want to match "sockets".  And this is just the tip of the
> iceberg in my opinion.
>
> The namespace bypassing to me is the biggest flaw in the UDP tunnel
> offloads.  That is creating real dangers right now.

I agree.  Fortunately this only really becomes an issue if SR-IOV is
enabled.  Otherwise the port based offloads only affect the PF as long
as no VFs are present.

> But anyways, the vastness of the key is why we want to keep "sockets"
> out of network cards, because proper support of "sockets" requires
> access to information the card simply does not and should not have.

Right.  Really what I would like to see for most of these devices is a
2 tuple filter where you specify the UDP port number, and the PF/VF ID
that the traffic is received on.  In order to get that we wouldn't
need any additional information from the API.  Then we at least have
indirect namespace isolation, and if someone really wanted to they
could do offloads on the VFs for different traffic.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-06-21 17:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 82+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-06-16 19:20 [net-next PATCH v3 00/17] Future-proof tunnel offload handlers Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:20 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:20 ` [net-next PATCH v3 01/17] vxlan/geneve: Include udp_tunnel.h in vxlan/geneve.h and fixup includes Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:20   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 23:06   ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-06-16 23:06     ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-06-16 19:20 ` [net-next PATCH v3 02/17] net: Combine GENEVE and VXLAN port notifiers into single functions Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:20   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 22:45   ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-06-16 22:45     ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-06-16 19:21 ` [net-next PATCH v3 03/17] net: Merge VXLAN and GENEVE push notifiers into a single notifier Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:21   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 22:47   ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-06-16 22:47     ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-06-16 19:21 ` [net-next PATCH v3 04/17] bnx2x: Move all UDP port notifiers to single function Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:21   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:21 ` [net-next PATCH v3 05/17] bnxt: Update drivers to support unified UDP encapsulation offload functions Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:21   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:21 ` [net-next PATCH v3 06/17] bnxt: Move GENEVE support from hard-coded port to using port notifier Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:21   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 23:12   ` Michael Chan
2016-06-16 23:12     ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Michael Chan
2016-06-16 19:21 ` [net-next PATCH v3 07/17] benet: Replace ndo_add/del_vxlan_port with ndo_add/del_udp_enc_port Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:21   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:21 ` [net-next PATCH v3 08/17] fm10k: " Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:21   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:22 ` [net-next PATCH v3 09/17] i40e: Move all UDP port notifiers to single function Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:22   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:22 ` [net-next PATCH v3 10/17] ixgbe: Replace ndo_add/del_vxlan_port with ndo_add/del_udp_enc_port Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:22   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:22 ` [net-next PATCH v3 11/17] mlx4_en: " Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:22   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:22 ` [net-next PATCH v3 12/17] mlx5_en: " Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:22   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:22 ` [net-next PATCH v3 13/17] nfp: " Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:22   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:22 ` [net-next PATCH v3 14/17] qede: Move all UDP port notifiers to single function Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:22   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:23 ` [net-next PATCH v3 15/17] qlcnic: Replace ndo_add/del_vxlan_port with ndo_add/del_udp_enc_port Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:23   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:23 ` [net-next PATCH v3 16/17] net: Remove deprecated tunnel specific UDP offload functions Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:23   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 22:59   ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-06-16 22:59     ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-06-16 19:23 ` [net-next PATCH v3 17/17] vxlan: Add new UDP encapsulation offload type for VXLAN-GPE Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 19:23   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Alexander Duyck
2016-06-16 23:01   ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-06-16 23:01     ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-06-18  3:26 ` [net-next PATCH v3 00/17] Future-proof tunnel offload handlers David Miller
2016-06-18  3:26   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " David Miller
2016-06-20 17:05   ` Tom Herbert
2016-06-20 17:05     ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Tom Herbert
2016-06-20 18:11     ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-06-20 18:11       ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-06-20 19:27       ` Tom Herbert
2016-06-20 19:27         ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Tom Herbert
2016-06-20 21:36         ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-06-20 21:36           ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-06-20 21:45           ` Tom Herbert
2016-06-20 21:45             ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Tom Herbert
2016-06-21  8:34       ` David Miller
2016-06-21  8:34         ` [Intel-wired-lan] " David Miller
2016-06-21  8:22     ` David Miller
2016-06-21  8:22       ` [Intel-wired-lan] " David Miller
2016-06-21 10:41       ` Edward Cree
2016-06-21 10:41         ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Edward Cree
2016-06-21 15:23       ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-06-21 15:23         ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-06-21 17:05       ` Alexander Duyck [this message]
2016-06-21 17:05         ` Alexander Duyck
2016-06-21 17:27         ` Edward Cree
2016-06-21 17:27           ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Edward Cree
2016-06-21 17:40           ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-06-21 17:40             ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-06-21 18:17             ` Alexander Duyck
2016-06-21 18:17               ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Alexander Duyck
2016-06-21 18:42               ` Tom Herbert
2016-06-21 18:42                 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Tom Herbert
2016-06-21 21:34                 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-06-21 21:34                   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-06-21 18:23             ` Edward Cree
2016-06-21 18:23               ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Edward Cree

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CAKgT0Ucze-+PYdvoHhDSLuaTLrn+Ene+CnfJaKO7AEHGHBsKzg@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=alexander.duyck@gmail.com \
    --cc=Dept-GELinuxNICDev@qlogic.com \
    --cc=aduyck@mirantis.com \
    --cc=ariel.elior@qlogic.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=eugenia@mellanox.com \
    --cc=hannes@redhat.com \
    --cc=intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org \
    --cc=jbenc@redhat.com \
    --cc=jesse@kernel.org \
    --cc=michael.chan@broadcom.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=saeedm@mellanox.com \
    --cc=tom@herbertland.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.